Staples has been really fascinating for me to read after all the PwJ folks.

But the full account of that Christo-logic is just what I attempted in my book, including the “dilemma of creation” implied by (1) Maximus’s point here about God never needing evil and yet (2) his other point that one would need to know God fully first to know creation rightly.

But Maximus goes on in that same text to argue for an identity indeed, the Logos is the logoi and the reverse. Here again one must trace the Christo-logic thoroughly to see that this other type of identity isn’t somehow not an identity. So the person here limits himself to options Maximus transcends

Moreover, Maximus’s critique of “Origenism” in Amb 7 isn’t simply a negation of the absolute’s self-othering. It’s first of all a rejection of a *serial* and thus merely finite self and relation that, qua finite, is either perpetually insecure or a mere external contrast.

absoluteness—or as he says of the PhG in the preface to the science of logic, it establishes “the idea of the absolute.” Reading this the way one reads a treatise on being is a prolonged category error.

He doesn’t get Hegel right, since Hegel always thinks the Absolute’s “self-Othering” except as Trinity, and thence any relative difference through Christ. Also, the PhG is not a straightforward ontology; it is a phenomenology, ie an account of how finite reason experiences its own mediated..

I’m with you

Not close

Well, I wouldn’t say that. For an intro to Hegel himself, I’d start with Houlgate and/or Peter Hodgson (Hegel & Christian Theology).

For Rose, I recommend the following and in this order: Mourning Becomes the Law, Dialectic of Nihilism, The Broken Middle, Hegel Contra Sociology, Love’s Work—that’s a good start!

Just did, ya dopes

I’m here for it and putting this in my basket

Damn looks great

“And I won’t admit I ever didn’t.”

I’d add IV.

His anti-Hegel invective is so passé.

Yep.